Mitt Romney: In 10 Years, 90% Of Purchased Cars Will Be Electric Cars

Mitt Romney has a history in the automotive industry, and he believes that most Americans will turn to electric cars in the near future.

Republican Mitt Romney served as the 70th Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007. He also ran against President Barack Obama as the Republican Party nominee in the 2012 election. Interestingly, Romney’s father was the CEO of AMC (American Motor Company). The family’s roots trace back to Detroit, thus he grew up surrounded by the Big Three automakers.

Chevrolet Bolt EV

Romney recently spoke at the Farm Bureau trade show in Utah. The state is more aggressive than Michigan in regards to electric-car efforts and is hoping to increase EV charging infrastructure in the near future.

Romney now lives in Utah, so it comes as no surprise that he was a guest speaker at the event. The former presidential nominee spoke to many issues that are currently hot topics in Washington D.C., like healthcare, environmental policy, and ever-changing technology. Romney said:

“Exponential progress and innovation is what’s just beginning to hit the world — now not just in computers.

You’re going to see healthcare change, automobiles change — in my view, in about 10 years, I’ll bet 90 percent of the cars we buy are electric.”

Romney just announced his bid for the U.S. Senate, with plans to fill Utah’s open seat upon the upcoming retirement of Republican Senator Orrin Hatch.

Romney is proud of Utah’s efforts and reminded the attendees that the state has low debt, high employment growth, high income, minimal government spending, and low carbon dioxide emissions when compared with most other states. He concluded:

“I’m absolutely convinced that Utah is a model for the nation, that Utah has a lot to teach the nation at large.”

I have an electric car butMitt is quite optimistic as to the future related to timelines. Development work as to batteries and software, the grid and distribution of chargers as a business continues but it is not supportive of 10 years. Add manufacturing and materials needed for batteries and in more advance European nations, only the smallest ones have made headway. Thanks for the support Mitt!

Well it boils down to where you draw the line of “electric”. For example, often times non-plugin hybrids are classified as electric.

So if that is where the line is drawn, he is most likely correct.

I personally predict that by 2022-2024, over 50% of new cars sold will be BEV/PHEV/HEV(So in 4-6 years) and by 2034, over 50% of cars on the road will be BEV. 10 years for 90% is feasible.

To be honest the default ICE car may soon disappear as battery prices fall. If it costs $100 for a manufacturer to put in a 1kwh lithium ion battery why not do it? This is why we are seeing quite a few manufacturers declare that they will offer a hybrid to every car model they have. If they can do that within $500 of the ICE model or better yet same price (by saving money by using a smaller engine), it’ll easily take over.

I understand that the dirvetrain has to change, but the cost of the drivetrain change as long as they are producing in bulk is not a big deal. Part of the hybrid cost is lack of economies of scale and battery costs. With those 2 cost factors addressed, I think using a cheaper less powerful engine + weak electric motor + battery can come close to the cost of an ICE with economies of scale.

The only thing missing currently is a comprehensive long-distance EV driving rapid charging infrastructure – and maybe the same for those who don’t have off-street parking (OSP). 99% of people that do have OSP can own an EV right now with zero % change to 99% of their normal lives – and they won’t need anything more complicated/expensive than a standard 240VAC socket, either.

I like Mitt. I voted for him in 2008. I don’t know if he knows anything about cars, but his dad did a fantastic job at AMC when he was there! When George Romney left to go be governor, his successor at AMC basically squandered all of the company’s good fortune under Romney.

The Republican House with it’s large Republican majority passed legislation killing the $7500 fed incentive in December of last year. The only thing that saved it is that R’s did not have the same large majority in the Senate.

Speaking of the House, the bill that authorized the $7500 tax incentive was written and sponsored by a Democrat, and passed by a simple majority with 228 Democrats voting for it. While only 35 R’s voted for it. 159 R’s voted against it. It was passed despite R’s voting in mass against the bill. So it cracks me up when people pretend that it was somehow a Republican tax credit.

A lot of GOP members voted against the bill until it got to the form it finally passed in, at that point…

“The revised Senate bill passed 86-8 on December 13. The House approved this final version 314-100 on December 18, and President Bush signed it the following day.”

The GOP voted en masse for the bill when it stopped being a Dem attack on the energy industry. Just 9 GOP Senators and 5 Dem Senators either refused to vote for it or voted against it. And it was W that signed it into law.

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who are interested in electric cars and green energy who vote Republican. Now people can vote how they want and maybe these issues are not as important to them as others. That’s legitimate and I can understand it.
But anybody for whom these issues are paramount shouldn’t play clueless. I don’t know everything. Maybe I missed another perspective and I welcome any suggestions.

Where/when did Tesla say this? The last statement that I remember was that they weren’t planning anything cheaper than the model 3, because with the income from the Tesla network the model 3 was supposedly going to be cheap enough.

90% may be optimistic but if the economics are what they appear to be then all negative factors likely would take second place / be all but meaningless. especially when factoring in other positives like performance.

I don’t think commute charging is near as important as destination or home charging and all it should take is a clear shifting to make both entirely commonplace.

If he is including hybrids, plug in hybrids, and mild hybrids I bet he is right. If he is talking pure BEV, it is a big stretch. 10 years is a long time, but look at Norway. In 2007 they registered 321 electrics, in 2017 it exploded to 71,737. If anything, the next decade will be exciting.

He said “90 percent of the cars we buy are electric” in about ten years. He did not say “90% of Americans driving electric”, which will take much longer as the enormous ICE fleet is eventually displaced. Still, I agree that this is a welcome development – especially from a prominent GOP member (the party of fossil fuels and climate science denial). This ranks up their with the Rockefeller family divesting from fossil fuels back in 2014.

I think he could be right, although I don’t trust Mitt’s ‘conversion’ to be anything other than politically motivated.

Everything doesn’t fit into your regimented partisan view of the world. Romney’s 02478 zip code in Massachusetts had the highest number of EV registrations both in absolute and per-capita terms (I’m counting rebate stats) last year. Twice as many EV registrations per-capita as the ultra lefty 02138 Cambridge zip code next door and 12 times the Trump voters.

Especially on the Volt. The articles and stories on the Volt were embarassing.

But their reviews of the gen-2 Volt and Bolt were actually quite positive. Day by day, EVs are becoming less if the political issue they were in 2012. It is a testament to EVs more than to any politician. Even liberal publications were spreading the ‘dirty coal, well to wheels’ propoganda as an excuse for ‘not gonna buy an EV now. But maybe eventually once they’re cleaner.

Hey two volts where is the second largest amount of EV that are on the road? What state has the highest amount of wind energy with the fourth largest renewable capacity? That would be Texas. Out of the top 10 renewable energy states it is almost split between GOP and Dem controlled. Your partisan antics only drive a further wedge into EV adoption. Plus who was it again that signed into law the federal tax credit? Oh ya that was Bush.

What did the dems do on the federal level during Obama’s 8 years with a supermajority in each house at the beginning of his presidency to promote EV’s? Oh that’s right nothing but lip service.

Please keep the politics out of it as EV’s should not be politicised only promoted.

“Please keep the politics out of it as EV’s should not be politicised only promoted.”

Yes. Of course. Because politics play absolutely no role in the treatment of EV / Renewable Energy policy by the two parties. Both parties are exactly the same, and equally committed to the success of renewables and electric vehicles.

Hey Volt that is by percentage I said second largest amount of EV and that is Texas. Last I checked you could buy EV in Texas just not Tesla and we are working on that. Still tell me again what Obama did for the EV movement compared with Bush giving us the tax credit?

‘Per capita’ is a better measure than absolute – don’t you agree? Or are you implying that Texas is ‘greener’ than Vermont (to pick an example) simply because Texas is a big state with a lot more people ?

In general, there is much less partisanship and rigid ideology at the state level than in Washington. At the national level, the GOP is the still the party of ‘monied interests’ (big banks, NRA, big Pharma, polluters, Koch brothers,…).

Yes. Bush “gave us” the EV tax credit with overwhelming support from Dems, and as part of a much larger bill that gave big benefits to domestic oil companies as well.

Obama tried to increase the credit to $10k and make it a ‘point of sale’ credit. As you recall – if you are honest with yourself – the GOP obstructed many of Obama’s proposals – and actively opposed initiatives to promote renewables and electric vehicles. They still do today which is why we see proposals to end the EV credit abruptly, impose temporary 30% solar tariffs designed to thwart the 30% solar tax credit, and the gutting of the EPA under Pruitt.

Let’s not pretend that Bush and the GOP are champions of EVs or green energy.

Not a very relevant comparison… 02138 is Harvard University… I used to live in that Zip code. Even two decades ago, car ownership was close to nil. Many of the residents are dorm students, many of the rest are lowish-salary faculty. It’s nearly impossible to own cars there — no parking — and low motivation to: good mass transit.
02438 is Belmont, a full-on suburb where eveybody has cars.

Lol. A Harvard comment that assumes everything revolves around them. How “Good Will Hunting” if you. 02138 is much larger than Harvard University. There are 35,000 people who live here, myself included and most of us have nothing to do with the university. We have driveways, kids, cars, and healthy incomes in non academic fields. You should have ventured outside Harvard when you lived here.

They don’t all live in 02138. Harvard’s dorms are mostly in other zip codes, including in Allston, MA. Less than 25% of 02138’s population are “college students” and that includes other colleges that Lesley that are in the same zip code.

It’s been a weird decade in politics. The issue goes back to 2010. After the 2008 election the Republican party really should have been out of power for the better part of a decade where they moderated and reinvented themselves.

The problem is that the extreme backlash to health care reform resulted in them getting back into power even though they became more extreme (there may also have been a racial component). That year also coincided with the census so they were able to entrench themselves in power through gerrymandering.

Fast-forward to today and the Republicans are barely even capable of governing, even though they control all levers of government.

What really would be best for the country is for the Republican party to suffer a really bad loss for several cycles that allows them to jettison their extremists and come back to the middle.

If Romney sets himself up as a moderate, maybe he’ll be in good position to run for the presidency again in 2028. But based on his track record he’ll probably jump the gun in 2024 and lose again.

If you think few superchargers and Leaf with it awful reputation of eating battery capacity were positive things, you’re delusional. Volt sorta made sense, except that meant it must have gas engine in it.

Proliferation of Superchargers and only 15 minutes on average to get to 80% (SparkEV, see my blog) is a whole different ball-game. In the future, you won’t need an hour (or hours) at public charger, unless of course, you’re waiting for free charger.

If they wouldn’t have Laughed Pres Carter out of the Presidency Back in the 1970’s when he proposed Renewable energy , This would have Happened 10 yrs Ago plus for sure. Carter was on the Right Track Way Back Then, But everyone went Against Him, they thought he was Crazy….CRAZY LIKE A FOX Carter Was !

The problem with Carter’s message was that he was trying to sell a negative message, and even worse, one which would have sent the economy into a tailspin. You don’t sell people on “living with less” and “tightening your belt” in a consumer-driven economy; that’s a sure path to recession or even depression.

No, what Carter should have done was emphasize the advantages of living and working more efficiently “Energy Star” appliances, companies changing their manufacturing processes to use energy more efficiently, people using compact fluorescent light bulbs in their homes instead of incandescent bulbs, cars with higher MPG… all these could have been used as positive examples of how to improve our lives and our economy by living more efficiently, and saving money at the same time!

Carter’s heart was (and is) in the right place, but he was a lousy salesman for the “green” agenda. Perhaps if his message had been better, he wouldn’t have lost the re-election campaign to Reagan. He certainly lost my vote.

“If they wouldn’t have Laughed Pres Carter out of the Presidency Back in the 1970’s when he proposed Renewable energy”.

The US commitment to oil is driven by our defense of the US dollar as the primary means of settling international trades. It is the key driver of US foreign policy even today. The US Petrodollar System (with dollar recycling to US institutions) was negotiated by Kissinger with the Saudis in the 1970’s after Nixon was forced to take the US dollar off the gold standard. That agreement remains – to this day – one of the key pillars holding up the US financial system.

It is really no accident that the USA stands alone against the rest of the world on the key issue of climate change and the imperative to reduce the burning of fossil fuels.

I voted for him, but his message was one of austerity (and driving 55 MPH). That was too much pain for Americans, who prefer to keep the party going as long as possible.

Indeed, Romney certainly was not right about everything, but then again no one is. Remember during one of the debates when he said Russia was America’s top geopolitical threat, and Obama snidely remarked that the 1980’s called and they want their foreign policy back? Seems to me based on all these Russian trolls interfering with the 2016 election Romney has been proved right. Too bad the man who won in 2012 dismissed Russia and ignored them as a threat for so many years.

I remember those debates sadly. Mitt won, but given the media support for Obama, it came out more like a draw with tie going to the incumbent. It was like a seasoned successful businessman debating the dope smoking debate club guy from the local university, and the unaccomplished dope smoker was declared the winner.
Mitt isn’t much, but I think he is close to being right on this, even if 10 years is a bit short for even PHEV/BEV’s combined to hit 90%.

When Mitt wrote off 47% of the electorate, he did as much damage to himself as Hillary did when she referred to conservatives as “deplorables”. That move probably cost Mitt at least 1% of the vote and a lot of momentum. That was simply a stupid thing to say.

There is RAPIDLY growing evidence that the Trumpsters were colluding with a foreign adversary and prepare for MAJOR hysterics and diversions by both Pres. Voldemort , the redneck media and his white nationalist supporters.

I predict that the Trumpeter himself will fire Mueller and start a war just to try and weasel out of it.

So was it wrong for Obama to ask for space until after the election? Because it sure sounded like a quid pro quo that involved an election and a favor from a foreign government.
But I guess it is different because the US politician asking Russia for a favor was Obama, so the rules need not apply to him.

Glad you beat me to it. I remember this distinctly. Why I didn’t consider him worth my checkbox in the presidential election. Politicians are predominantly useless and naive, elected by the majority of naive people who may or may not be useless. Ray Bradbury touched on this with his short story Morons!

I guess the fossil fuel lobbyists did not donate enough cash. A politician telling it like it is! Once the 3 and the new leaf get out there in volume word of mouth will be all it takes to fuel the transition. This cuurrent assault on the environment (fuel economy standards )by the president will hopefully be the last one.

Interesting, Romney finally said something that I understand and that makes sense. It would be cool if the Trump wing of the party soaked up all the kookiness, allowing Romney’s wing of the party the freedom to resume being rational.

Those rational “Binders full of Women” (10/16/12), are making the “Kookiness” in the “Trump Wing”, look as though strapping your dog on top of your car (1982), in a windshield equipped pet carrier, is a fantastic idea, for a 12 hour ( YES, Twelve Hour!) road trip family fun vacation getaway.

Nice find/verify — “George Wilcken Romney (July 8, 1907 – July 26, 1995) was an American businessman and Republican Party politician. He was chairman and president of American Motors Corporation from 1954 to 1962, the 43rd Governor of Michigan from 1963 to 1969, and the United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 1969 to 1973. He was the father of 2003–07 Governor of Massachusetts and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and the grandfather of current Republican National Committee chair Ronna Romney McDaniel.”

His family left for Mexico to avoid American polygamy laws, they lived there for decades without getting citizenship, they fled violence with their Mexican born son, George, and became valuable contributors to American society. There were days when common sense prevailed and immigration wasn’t a wedge issue.

Hold on there. What Romney actually said and what the title of the article says are very different. Romney said in ten years 90% of car sales will be electric. That is VERY different than saying that in 10 years 90% of us will be driving electric cars.

If Romney is right (and I hope he is) then most new cars will be electric and most older cars will be gas. And at that point, probably most Americans will be driving a gas car.

Which in and of itself is a pathetic indictment of how pitiful Amerikan politics have become. Imagine a alternative universe where the 2016 contest was Gore v Romney. Who would’ve won and what would the political, social and economic look liike?

I want to believe but I can’t believe this because:
1) PHEV/BEV versions of most of the top 10 selling vehicles are nowhere in sight.
2) Its the battery supply stupid. We would need to be breaking ground on the 10+ giga factories by now.
I will be *thrilled* if we are at 20% by then.

10 years will be in 2028.
2025 mandates will require 5.5% market share of long-range BEV _minimum_, with more if PHEVs. At that point the numbers would be large enough to force companies to put some real effort in.

Given that it only takes about 2 years to get battery manufacturing up and running, there’s potential for explosive growth if companies really see good prospects on cost in the early 2020s.

If there’s reason that the percentage would be lower, at least for plug-ins it’s that there are significant barriers to home charging for a good chunk of the market.

So I would say the optimistic forecast would be 40% to 50% in 10 years, and then rapid growth after that as access to charging becomes easier.

GOP message has been the same for years cut taxes and borrow and spend, support the fossil fuel industry by cutting regulations and tax incentives and allow assault weapons and 20 round magazines Plus conceal carry in every state even by passing existing state and city laws. The GOP are funded by the rich and corpoations like the coal barons the Koch brothers, Adelso, Wynn, and the. NRA. Koch Brothers alone plans to spend 400 million on the midterm elections to buy the government that will work for them. Trump will make Mitt Romney look like a fool if he refuses to support his agenda. Just like he did when he played him for the Secretary of State job.

There are dynamics that complicate what you offer. Only a dozen Republican states have sizable oil, or fossil, production in their economies. Many more, like Iowa, rely on wind. OK and TX have both “purple” vote transitions and renewable explosions going on, beyond the fossils.

Scott Pruitt was the Attorney General for Oklahoma and sued the EPA over 50 times. Now he’s the head of the EPA
Rick Perry was the Govenor of Texas and the Department he couldn’t remember during the debate that he wanted to eliminate was the Department of Energy. Now he in charge of the Department of Energy and he tried to get additional subsidies for coal an nuclear generation units across the country.

As if I care what Willard “Mitt” Romney thinks. This is the guy that when a young man basically made his riches laundering drug-money, and now with is Asset Stripping (ruining good companies and making all their workers unemployed) Bain Capital – Romney, unlike his father has used his entire adult life to make $millions off the backs of poor – (Now) unemployed people.

Just like Trump is a Phoney, as a for instance he campaigned to ‘defund Planned Parenthood’ but the latest budget just signed into Law by El Presidente fully funds them, yet he claims that his next ‘budget’ plan fully funds them – and his supporters STILL believe in him.

Romney would be even worse if thats possible. I always thought Obama was G.W. Bush on steroids, but there were a few things Obams did that I agree with, such as being a somewhat reluctant warrior (thought twice about obliterating Syria), and also restrained some federal spending in a few places. So I would have voted for Obama, could he have run last time as he was more fiscally conservative than Trump, and he had proof that he was.

But I have no doubt that if people dislike Trump, they’d see Romney as even worse.

I don’t care what ‘feel good’ talk he is spouting now. People should look at what politicians DO, since they will SAY anything.

This conversation is as if there is only one country on the planet that builds, drives and can push forward the advancement of vehicles.
EV adoption and advancement will be driven by Europe, by China, even India wants in on the EV revolution.
We wont’t all be driving EV’s, but any new car sold will be an EV. The tech, the efficiency, the performance, the ride quality… will all be so far ahead of a comparable ICE. Manufacturers seeing this trend are not going to run two seperate production lines. Like flip phones… ICE’s won’t make financial sense and just to survive they’ll start dropping ICE models and production. Resale value (real or perceived) will be far higher on EV’s than ICE’s.
Too many people are stuck in a linear mindset. The amount of change we will see in the next 10 years will make the last 20 seem boring. There are several industries and converging technologies that will all reach consumer adoption within the next 5 – 10 that will have a ripple effect we can’t yet comprehend.